SPEECH 

OF 

HON.  H  E  E  MAN  P .  GOEBEL. 


The  House  being  in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  House  on  the  state  of 
the  Union  and  haying  under  consideration  the  bill  H.  R.  17850 — the 
naval  appropriation  bill — 

Mr.  GOEBEL  said : 

Mr.  Chairman:  Immigration  and  naturalization  necessarily 
go  hand  in  hand  and  are  subjects  of  vital  importance  to  the  wel¬ 
fare  of  our  common  country.  I  am  a  firm  believer  in  stringent 
immigration  laws  and  in.  the  strict  enforcement  of  them.  Sev¬ 
eral  bills  are  now  pending  in  this  House  on  that  subject,  and  I 
hope  that  in  the  near  future  some  legislation  will  be  enacted 
which  will  have  a  tendency  to  check  the  influx  of  an  undesirable 
class  of  aliens.  It  is  indeed  unfortunate  that,  notwithstanding 
our  present  laws,  we  have  received  such  a  large  and  very  unde¬ 
sirable  class  of  foreigners.  They  are  necessarily  a  menace  to 
good  government ;  and  there  is  evidently  a  defect  somewhere 
in  our  present  system  which  has  enabled  this  class  of  aliens  to 
land  in  our  midst. 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  subject  is  not  before  us  at  this  time. 
We  are  now  considering  the  bill  introduced  by  the  gentleman 
from  New  Jersey  [Mr.  Howell],  as  reported  by  the  Committee 
on  Immigration  and  Naturalization,  which  provides,  in  part,  for 
a  uniform  rule  of  naturalization  of  aliens  throughout  the 
United  States.  I  shall  address  myself  especially  to  section  9 
of  the  bill,  which  provides,  among  other  things,  “  that  no  alien 
shall  hereafter  be  naturalized  or  admitted  as  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States  who  can  not  write  in  his  own  language  or  in  the 
English  language,  and  who  can  not  read,  speak,  and  understand 
the  English  language.”  The  reason  urged  for  this  provision  is 
found  in  the  report  of  the  committee,  which  reads  as  follows : 

It  has  seemed  to  your  committee  that  any  alien  of  ordinary  intelli¬ 
gence  who  desires  to  take  advantage  of  these  opportunities  and  to  fit 
himself  for  citizenship  in  our  country  could,  in  five  years’  residence, 
which  is  required  in  the  country  before  he  can  apply  for  naturalization, 
acquire  sufficient  education  to  comply  with  the  requirements  that  he 
shall  be  able  to  either  read  in  his  own  language  or  in  the  English  lan¬ 
guage  and  speak,  read,  and  understand  the  English  language.  If  an 
alien  be  so  deficient  in  mental  capacity  as  to  be  unable  to  meet  that  re¬ 
quirement  or  so  careless  of  the  opportunities  afforded  him,  it  is  the 
opinion  of  your  committee  that  he  would  not  make  a  desirable  citizen 
and  should  be  refused  naturalization. 

Mr.  Chairman,  no  one  will  contend,  as  an  abstract  proposition, 
that  it  would  not  be  better  for  the  individual  that  he  speak, 
read,  and  understand  the  English  language ;  not  because,  in  my 
judgment,  it  would  make  him  a  better  citizen  of  the  United 
States,  but  because  it  is  the  language  of  our  country,  and  with 
it  he  ought  to  be  familiar.  But  I  resent  the  imputation  that  the 
6859  3 


4 


absence  of  that  requirement  makes  him  an  undesirable  citizen 
and,  therefore,  naturalization  should  be  refused  him.  You 
will  observe  that  by  this  bill,  although  an  alien  may  be  of  good 
moral  character,  a  firm  believer  in  our  form  of  government,  and 
willing  to  support  and  defend  the  Constitution  and  laws,  and 
who  may  possess  all  the  other  qualifications  of  good  citizen¬ 
ship,  yet  lacking  this  one  qualification,  namely,  to  be  able  to 
read,  speak,  and  understand  the  English  language,  is  absolutely 
disqualified.  Again,  has  it  occurred  to  the  gentlemen  advocating 
this  measure  that  this  is  discriminating  in  favor  of  the  English- 
speaking  as  against  the  German  and  every  other  non-English- 
speaking  alien?  Why  this  discrimination?  Why  discriminate, 
for  instance,  against  the  Germans?  Have  they  nowT  become  so 
undesirable  for  lacking  the  qualification  required  in  this  bill ; 
and  why  were  they  not  so  at  any  other  time?  Read  the  history 
of  the  United  States  and  you  will  acknowledge  that  the  Germans 
have  t^iken  an  honorable  part  in  the  development  of  our  nation ; 
in  the  tendency  toward  government  for  the  people  and  by  the 
people  and  in  the  development  of  national  and  individual  pros¬ 
perity  the  German  influence  has  made  itself  felt 

The  German  thought  tends  to  strengthen  the  feeling  that  im¬ 
plies  not  only  right,  but  duty.  They  have  never  wavered  iu 
their  loyalty,  and  in  that  respect  never  gave  blind  obedience 
to  any  creed,  party,  or  class,  but  ever  marching  on  to  a  higher 
aim  of  the  moral  and  intellectual  growth  of  this  nation.  The 
share  of  the  German  in  the  wars  of  the  United  States  is  by  no 
means  limited  to  the  rebellion.  From  the  very  beginning  of 
their  settlement  in  this  country  they  have  always  stood  ready 
to  take  their  place  in  its  defense.  They  took  a  full  share  in 
the  war  of  1812  and  in  the  Mexican  war,  and  at  all  times  gave 
freely  of  their  men  and  their  means  to  the  cause  of  liberty  in 
the  war  of  the  rebellion,  and  wherever  they  were  strongest  in 
numbers  they  gave  more  than  the  proportionate  strength  to  the 
forces  raised  for  the  defense  of  the  Union.  In  those  days  the 
question  was  not  raised  whether  he  could  read,  speak,  and  under¬ 
stand  the  English  language.  I  point  with  pride  to  my  German 
fellow-citizens  and  to  their  history,  that  in  war  and  in  peace 
they  have  always  done  their  duty. 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  here  urged  that  if  an  alien  is  so 
careless  of  the  opportunities  afforded  him  as  not  to  be  able  to 
read,  speak,  and  understand  the  English  language  naturalization 
ought  to  be  refused  to  him.  The  fact  is  lost  sight  of  that  he 
may  not  have  the  opportunities ;  or  that  he  may  not  be  able  to 
avail  himself  of  such  opportunities.  It  is  no  answer  to  say  that 
if  he  does  not  understand  our  language,  how  can  he  understand 
our  form  of  government  and  its  requirements  of  him  as  a  citizen? 

Let  me  say  to  you  that  newspapers  and  other  publications 
printed  in  his  own  language  give  him  the  desired  information. 
By  assimilating  and  coming  in  contact  with  our  own  people  he 
is  soon  informed  of  the  requirements  of  a  citizen  under  our  form 
of  government.  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  we  are  dealing  here  with 
naturalization  affecting  Federal  citizenship,  as  distinguished 
from  State  citizenship,  and  there  is  a  wide  distincton  between 
the  two.  One  carries  obligations  of  a  different  nature  than  that 
of  the  other.  But  before  discussing  that  proposition  let  me  say 
that  this  bill  does  not  provide  for  an  examination  or  test.  It 
would  therefore  depend  entirely  upon  the  judge  before  whom 
the  applicant  appeared  whether  he  can,  at  least  to  his  satisfac- 
6859 


tion,  read,  speak,  and  understand  the  English  language.  In  no 
instances,  therefore,  it  will  be  observed,  would  such  an  examina¬ 
tion  or  test  be  uniform.  One  judge  may  fix  a  high  standard, 
while  another  may  be  more  lax  in  the  requirements.  Again,  an 
applicant  may  be  able  to  speak  and  understand  the  English  lan¬ 
guage,  but  not  be  able  to  read  it;  for,  mark  you,  he  must  be 
able  to  read,  speak,  and  understand  the  English  language.  IIow 
accurate  shall  he  be  in  his  reading,  speaking,  and  understand¬ 
ing?  Suppose  the  judge  shall  require  as  a  test  that  the  appli¬ 
cant  speak  correctly  the  name  of  the  gentleman  from  Colorado 
[Mr.  Bonynge],  or  speak  correctly  the  name  of  the  gentleman 
from  Hawaii  [Mr.  Jona»h  Kuhio  Ivalanianaole],  would  the 
gentleman  from  Colorado  insist  that  that  individual  would  not 
make  a  good  citizen,  possessing  all  the  other  qualifications,  and 
that  naturalization  ought  to  be  refused  him?  It  can  be  readily 
seen  to  what  absurdities  this  provision  may  lead,  and  the  only 
way  to  obviate  that  condition  is  to  establish  a  board  of  exam¬ 
iners,  nonpartisan  in  its  character,  who  shall  be ‘governed  by 
uniform  rules,  so  that  in  the  examination  there  may  not  enter 
the  whims  and  prejudice  of  a  partisan  or  the  hatred  of  one 
against  a  class. 

Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  coming  to  the  proposition  to  which  I 
have  already  alluded,  I  contend  that  as  Congress  can  only  deal 
with  Federal  citizenship  the  educational  qualification  prescribed 
in  this  bill  is  not  essential  to  Federal  citizenship  and  that  it 
was  never  contemplated  by  the  Congress.  In  the  first  place, 
what  is  citizenship?  It  has  been  defined  as  “the  status  of  a 
citizen,  with  its  rights  and  privileges.”  “  He  is  a  member  of  a 
nation  or  a  sovereign  state,  especially  a  republic,  and  one  who 
owes  allegiance  to  a  government  and  is  entitled  to  protection 
from  it.”  (See  Standard  Dictionary  (1898)  ;  Webster’s  Dic¬ 
tionary  ;  Century  Dictionary ;  G  Am.  and  Eng.  Ency.  of  Law, 
2d  ed.) 

It  does  not  necessarily  follow  from  this  definition  that  the 
grade  or  quality  or  privilege  of  citizenship  must  be  identical 
in  all  citizens,  even  in  a  republican  government.  In  many  cases 
arising  under  our  system  it  has  been  repeatedly  decided  that 
the  bestowal  of  political  privileges  upon  an  individual  is  not 
essential  to  constitute  him  a  citizen.  (See  Wise  on  Citizen¬ 
ship,  p.  3,  and  authorities  there  cited.)  There  are  two  kinds 
of  citizenship  in  this  country,  national  and  State,  each  dis¬ 
tinct  from  the  other.  A  person  may  be  a  citizen  of  the  United 
States  without  enjoying  State  citizenship  and  the  special  rights 
and  privileges  which  State  citizenship  confers.  For  prior 
to  the  adoption  of  the  fourteenth  amendment  to  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  no  mode  existed  of  obtaining  citizenship 
of  the  United  States  except  by  first  becoming  a  citizen  of  some 
State;  but  after  the  adoption  of  the  fourteenth  amendment 
that  controversy  was  set  at  rest,  for  that  provision  defines  and 
declares  who  shall  be  citizens  of  the  United  States,  namely, 
“  all  persons  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United  States  and  sub¬ 
ject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof.” 

Congress  is  empowered  by  the  amendment  to  enforce,  with 
appropriate  legislation,  its  provisions,  and  it  did  so  by  enact¬ 
ing  “  that  all  persons  born  in  the  United  States  and  not  subject 
to  any  foreign  power,  exclusive  of  Indians  not  taxed,  shall  be 
citizens  of  the  United  States.”  Whatever  special  rights  and 
privileges  it  may  be  within  the  power  of  a  State  to  confer  upon 


6859 


6 


its  citizens,  there  are  certain  constitutional  rights  which  all 
“  Federal  citizens  ”  enjoy  in  common,  whether  they  are  citizens 
of  a  State  or  not.  As  to  all  common  rights,  the  Federal  Con¬ 
stitution  establishes  an  equality  between  all  persons,  although 
it  may  be  unable  to  confer  equality  as  to  other  privileges. 
These  rights  in  common  are  known  as  privileges  ana  immunities 
and  are  fundamental  in  character.  Federal  citizenship  may  be 
acquired  by  inheritance,  by  marital  relations,  by  the  union  or 
transfer  of  foreign  territory,  by  naturalization,  by  treaty,  by 
special  act  of  Congress,  by  the  admission  of  a  Territory  to 
statehood.  Such  a  citizen  owes  to  the  Government  allegiance, 
service,  and  money  by  way  of  taxes.  The  Government  in  turn 
grants  and  guarantees  him  liberty  of  his  person  and  conscience, 
the  right  of  acquiring  and  possessing  property,  security  in  per¬ 
son,  estate,  and  reputation.  Anyone  may  be  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States  and  yet  not  of  any  particular  State,  but  not  vice 
versa.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  in  what  is 
known  as  the  “Slaughterhouse  case”  (16  Wallace,  36),  held 
that  “  not  only  may  a  man  be  a  citizen  of  the  United  States 
without  being  a  citizen  of  a  State,  but  an  important  element 
is  necessary  to  convert  the  former  into  the  latter.  He  must 
reside  within  a  State  to  make  him  a  citizen  of  it ;  it  is  only 
necessary  that  he  should  be  born  or  naturalized  in  the  United 
States  to  be  a  citizen  of  the  Union.”  Federal  citizenship  is 
totally  unconnected  with  the  right  of  suffrage  or  the  elective 
franchise.  It  does  not  confer  the  right  to  vote.  Federal  citi¬ 
zenship  confers  no  political  rights  whatever.  Civil  and  political 
rights  have  been  definitely  disassociated  by  the  fourteenth 
amendment.  This  view  was  strongly  maintained  long  before 
the  adoption  of  the  fourteenth  amendment  by  the  minority  in 
the  Dred  Scott  case,  who  held  that  a  slave’s  lack  of  political 
rights  did  not  prevent  his  being  a  citizen  with  a  right  to  sue 
in  the  courts.  This,  however,  is  no  longer  disputed. 

A  Federal  citizen  owes  only  a  duty  to  the  General  Govern¬ 
ment,  and  that  is  limited  in  its  extent.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  the  Federal  Government  has  no  greater  power  than  that 
which  the  States  have  expressly  granted  and  that  all  other 
powers  have  been  reserved  by  the  States.  We  must,  therefore, 
conclude  that  the  powers  so  granted  are  never  exclusive  of 
similar  powers  existing  in  the  States,  except  when  exclusive 
powers  have  been  given,  or  the  exercise  of  like  powers  is  pro¬ 
hibited  to  the  States,  or  when  there  is  a  direct  repugnancy  or 
incompatibility  in  the  exercise  of  it  by  the  States. 

A  closer  sudy  of  the  question  will  reveal  how  little  has  been 
conferred  upon  the  Federal  Government  as  to  the  right  of 
creating  Federal  citizenship  and  how  much  has  been  retained 
by  the  States ;  for  let  me  repeat  that  Federal  citizenship  re¬ 
quires  only  fidelity  and  obedience  by  the  individual  to  his  Gov¬ 
ernment  ;  he  must  bear  his  burden  necessary  to  sustain  the 
Government  by  the  payment  of  taxes,  and  he  must  be  ready  to 
bear  arms  or  render  other  personal  service  for  the  common 
defense  and  for  the  security  of  the  liberties  and  general  wel¬ 
fare  of  the  Government.  In  return  for  this  he  receives  the 
protection  of  his  Government  in  the  manner  that  I  have  already 
indicated. 

I  pause  now  to  ask  whether  in  conferring  Federal  citizenship, 
or  whether  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  rights  which  such  citizen- 
6859 


7 


ship  confers,  it  is  essential  that  the  beneficiary  be  able  to  read, 
speak,  and  understand  the  English  language,  and  whether 
such  qualifications  (if  you  may  so  term  it)  are  essentially  pre¬ 
requisite  to  conferring  citizenship  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  it. 
I  contend  that  it  never  was  contemplated  by  the  States  that 
any  greater  pov^er  be  conferred  upon  the  Federal  Government 
in  that  regard  than  was  absolutely  necessary  to  safeguard  the 
Government  against  an  alien  of  bad  character  and  not  disposed 
to  the  good  order  and  happiness  of  our  Government ;  and  that  it 
was  left  to  the  State  to  enact  all  further  restrictions,  and  this 
must  be  apparent. 

The  present  acts  of  Congress  relating  to  naturalization  of 
aliens,  except  as  to  the  amendments  relating  to  the  thirteenth 
and  fourteenth  amendments,  has  been  in  force  for  more  than 
one  hundred  years.  It  has  stood  the  test,, of  time  and  expedi-. 
ency.  What  necessity  is  there  for  engrafting  upon  the  Federal 
statutes  such  a  qualification?  Why  not  leave  it,  as  it  has  been 
left,  to  the  States  to  regulate,  though  Cqngress  has  the  power 
to  so  prescribe?  It  might  with  some  force  be  said  that  the 
educational  qualification  is  essential  in  the  exercise  of  political 
rights.  Its  wisdom,  however,  I  question.  These  political  rights, 
however,  are  conferred  by  State  citizenship,  as  I  have  stated, 
and  not  by  Federal  citizenship.  These  rights  were  reserved  by 
the  States.  Although  the  Federal  authority  within  its  scope  is 
supreme  and  beyond  the  States,  it  can  not  prevent  nor  secure 
to  its  citizens  rights  and  privileges  which  are  not  expressly  or 
by  implication  placed  under  its  jurisdiction.  Therefore  one  of 
the  greatest  privileges  of  a  State  citizen  is  the  right  of  suffrage, 
or  the  elective  franchise.  This,  I  have  shown,  is  not  conferred 
upon  a  Federal  citizen.  The  privilege  of  voting  arises  under 
the  constitutions  of  the  States  and  not  under  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States. 

It  is  within  the  power  of  the  State  to  prescribe  the  qualifica¬ 
tions  of  a  voter,  and  the  power  is  almost  without  limitation. 
In  some  States  the  right  to  vote  has  been  granted  to  persons  not 
citizens.  It  can  restrict  the  right  to  either  sex  or  give  it  to 
both.  The  State  may  go  to  any  length  in  determining  the  quali¬ 
fications  of  voters.  The  United  States  circuit  court,  in  the  case 
of  The  United  States  against  Anthony  (11  Blatchford,  205), 
held  that  a  State  may,  without  violating  a  right  derived  from  the 
Federal  Constitution,  provide  that  no  person  having  gray  hair 
or  who  has  not  the  use  of  all  his  limbs  shall  be  entitled  to  vote. 
The  only  restriction  upon  the  States  is  that  they  can  not  ex¬ 
clude  a  citizen  from  the  enjoyment  of  the  franchise  on  account 
of  race,  color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude.  It  is  true 
that  a  citizen  of  a  State  owes  a  dual  allegiance,  but  the  nature 
of  the  obligation  is  different. 

I  have  tried  to  draw  a  distinction  between  a  Federal  citizen 
and  a  State  citizen,  and  that  the  former  has  only  civil  rights 
while  the  latter  has  both  civil  and  political  rights.  The  quali¬ 
fications  prescribed  by  section  9  of  this  bill  can  have  only  a  bear¬ 
ing  or  relate  to  the  exercise  of  political  rights,  and  hence  are 
not  essential  or  prerequisite  to  Federal  citizenship. 

Entertaining  these  views,  I  shall,  at  the  proper  time,  move 
to  strike  out  the  objectionable  feature.  [Loud  applause.] 

G359 


o 


112  061891757 


